"The principle of plausible denial is simply if an operation or act is later disclosed, for example, as an action of the United States government, the government can plausibly deny it, deny any involvement or connection with the action." --E. Howard Hunt, ex- CIA operative, quoted by Mark Lane in Plausible Denial.
The Mt. Carmel Center was situated outside Waco, in McLennan County, but the remains of the Branch Davidians were taken to Tarrant County, where the chief medical examiner of the Tarrant County Medical Examiners Office was Dr. Nizam Peerwani. During his testimony at the 1994 San Antonio trial of the Branch Davidians, Dr. Peerwani indicated the reason the autopsies were transferred to him was the superiority of autopsy facilities in Tarrant County (Transcript, pg. 5961. Among other facilities, Dr. Peerwani said he had a physical anthropology lab, a DNA lab, and a fingerprint examiner (Transcript, pgs. 5961 and 5965).
Yet despite claims about his office, during the autopsies Dr. Peerwani had to rely on anthropologists from the Smithsonian Institution for the bone sorting (Smithsonian Comes to Waco); he had to rely on "five or six" FBI fingerprint specialists assigned to his office by the FBI to identify the corpses (Transcript, pg. 5962). Nor did the Tarrant County DNA lab do the job for which Dr. Peerwani said his lab was chosen; the body of at least one of the deceased Branch Davidians, Sherri Jewell, was taken to the FBI laboratory in Washington, DC for DNA testing. (See how FBI fabricated evidence in the World Trade Center bombing case-- Testimony of Frederic Whitehurst.)
It was also evident that Dr. Peerwani was not in control of the identification process when he told the court on February 11, 1993 that the remains of Davidians Greg Summers, Scott Sonobe, and Jeff Little had not been identified. In fact, the remains of these men were identified several days before Dr. Peerwani's testimony, on February 8, 1993. "See Identification Matrix." Note that the three were identified by DNA testing.
Obviously the DNA work was not done in the lab over which Dr. Peerwani presided, and for which his office was supposedly chosen. The IDs were obviously done in the FBI labs, just has Sherri Jewell's ID had been done. The FBI lab did not keep Dr. Peerwani posted of its progress in a timely fashion, and thus his testimony was dated. Note that the Identification Matrix supplied by the Justice of the Peace of McLennan County does not bear any marks of official authorship. This ID Matrix is discussed more fully elsewhere in the Death Gallery.
Maps of Texas show that there were other large urban centers close to the Mt. Carmel Center. For example, the cities of Austin, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio were all within easy driving distance of Waco. The bodies could have been put in refrigerated vans and driven to any one of those locations.
Dr. Peerwani claimed that he had been called into the situation by the McLennan County Justice of the Peace, Judge Pareya (Transcript pg. 5962). However, Mt. Carmel was in Precinct 2 of McLennan County, which is under the jurisdiction not of Judge Pareya, but of Judge Collier. The appearance of "local control" did not even go skin deep--it was a veil to be used and dropped at will. Certainly the assault on the Branch Davidians was conducted by federal militia and the surviving Branch Davidians were tried in federal court for conspiracy to murder the ATF agents; but Dr. Peerwani was the chosen "local" for the autopsies.
Why was the Fort Worth Medical Examiners' Office in Tarrant County chosen? Because Dr. Peerwani was a man with a reputation for incompetence.
His appointment as autopsist was challenged immediately after the autopsies were assigned to him. The challenge came from Jeff Kearney, lawyer for one of the surviving Branch Davidians (Dallas Morning News, April 27, 1993). Among the complaints against Dr. Peerwani's office:
Dr. Peerwani was a good choice for persons who did not want the cause, manner, or time of death known. He could be relied upon to do clumsy, inept autopsies that would further destroy the bodies, and come up with nothing to incriminate the murderers.
He provided an excellent layer of plausible deniability for the US government. He, not the US, could be blamed for having bungled the autopsies. Further inquiries into the causes and manner of death of the Branch Davidians would be shrugged off as hopeless. Dr. Peerwani's selection as autopsist was part of a program of orchestrated incompetence, just as we saw in the Kennedy assassination.
We will see how the orchestrated incompetence of the Two Stooges, the Texas Rangers and the Tarrant County Medical Examiners Office, worked to accomplish the US government's plausible denial. The responsibility for the alteration of the crime scene and the destruction of evidence in the corpses of the Branch Davidians would now be shouldered by others.
It might be legitimately asked why the Museum has accepted any of the information contained in Autopsy Reports written under Dr. Peerwani's direction. The answer is that those reports are the official reports. While the Museum questions the veracity of many of the causes of death cited in the reports, we do not question the direct observations on the condition of the corpses. The autopsists had little reason to exaggerate the ghastly condition of the corpses--to do so would make the US military and the para-military forces of the FBI and ATF look even worse.
If the condition of the bodies was inaccurately described, the FBI, the Texas Rangers, and the forensic anthropologists from the Smithsonian Institution had every opportunity to protest and have the autopsies redone. They did not.
Next: Plausible Denial: The Texas Rangers
Back: Directory of Exhibits
Back: Death Gallery Entrance
Home: Museum Entrance
Search: Museum Text
Many people who distrust the mainstream media have turned to alternate news sources, some of which are Internet based. Unfortunately, many of these alternate sources of news simply promote an alternate series of lies. These alternate lies are of course dressed up as "exposés." But you can easily tell the phonies from the real thing. The information in the Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum is an acid test.
Does your news source promote Mike McNulty's video, Waco: The Rules of Engagement or wring its hands because the Davidian law suit against the government failed? (See Waco Documentary Is A Hoax! and Waco Suits for Waco Suckers.) Does your alternate news source carry promotional pieces about rebuilding the Davidian church in Waco and mouth nice words about "healing"? (See The Cover-up Church.)
Remember, since ancient times, inquiries into questionable deaths have started with the bodies of the victims. If your news source won't give you an honest and full account of the forensic information on Waco, or if it does not have a link to the Waco Holocaust Electronic Museum ... your alternate news has failed a fundamental acid test.
http://www.Public-Action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum
or http://206.55.8.10/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum
Curator@Public-Action.com
All original material is copyright 1996-2000 by Carol A. Valentine, on loan to Public Action, Inc.
Postal Address: Carol A. Valentine, PO Box 10933, Burke, VA 22009
This page last updated February 28, 2001.
Man!Regarding Peerwani and Waco, you make it SOUND as if Peerwani did all the work and autopsies HIMSELF - which is patently untrue!
From a documant titled:
I extracted this:Forensic Pathology Evaluation of the 1993 Branch Davidian Deaths and Other Pertinent Issues Prepared for the Office of Special Counsel John C. Danforth By Michael A. Graham, M.D. Professor of Pathology Co-director, Division of Forensic Pathology Saint Louis University School of Medicine The remains were processed and examined by a multi-agency multi-disciplinary team of experts and support personnel under the overall supervision of Nizam Peerwani, M.D. (forensic pathologist and Tarrant County Chief Medical Examiner). The processing/examining personnel consisted of forensic pathologists, dentists, anthropologists, latent print examiners, toxicologists, criminalists, photographers, radiology technician and support personnel. Additional anthropology assistance was rendered by personnel from the University of Tennessee (Knoxville).
I'm waiting for you to retract that ...
A review of Peerwani's crew's work was performed by the individual who wrote the report I cited earlier - here is an excerpt of that work:Page 9 of 151Davidians killed by firearms and later recovered from the burning structure were found in the communications room (MC 7, 8), kitchen/stairway/serving area (MC 43, 44, 45), (MC 20, 21, 22), top of concrete bunker (MC 34, 35, 36, 39, 41), on the surface in the concrete bunker (MC 31A, 31DE, 47) and in the concrete bunker debris (MC 53, 56, 66, 67-7/67-8).
Each of the Branch Davidian decedents succumbed to handgun/rifle injuries except one, MC 47, who died of a shotgun wound to the head. There were 16 Branch Davidian decedents with gunshot/shotgun wounds restricted to the head (12 adults and 4 children) (14 with single shots and 2 with multiple shots), 6 with gunshot injuries isolated to the torso (4 adults and 2 children) and 4 having gunshots to the head and torso (4 adults).
The determination of muzzlevictim distance, i.e. range of fire, involves identifying the presence and/or absence on or in the body of a variety of materials that are discharged from the muzzle of the gun in addition to the projectile.
These materials include flame, gas, smoke and gunpowder particles. The presence of searing, tissue disruption by gas and/or soot-powder propelled into the wound track indicates the muzzle of the gun was in contact with or very close to the surface when the gun was discharged. Gunsmoke deposited on the surface of the body, usually in conjunction with marks caused by powder particles striking the body (powder stippling or tattooing) denote a close range wound (usually within approximately 1 foot).
Powder stippling in the absence of smoke indicates a maximum range of fire of 2-3 feet depending on a variety of factors including the physical configuration of the gunpowder particles. Any material between the muzzle and the skin surface (such as clothing, dense scalp hair or other intermediate target) may affect the ability of these firearm discharge products from reaching the skin and thus affect the ability to accurately determine the range of fire. In the absence of material interposed between the muzzle and the target, wounds lacking the aforementioned features are classified as distant wounds. It should be remembered that in scientific parlance a distant wound is generally any wound received in excess of a few feet and does not necessarily entail great distances between the shooter and target. The progressive spread of shotgun pellets as the muzzle-target distance increases is also used to further estimate the range of fire in shotgun wounds caused by pellets.
Page 10 of 151
All of the gunshot injuries seen in the decedents recovered from the burned structure are consistent with having been received from guns fired from within the structure itself.
I do not see any evidence to indicate any of the Branch Davidian decedents recovered from the burned structure received gunshot injuries originating outside the complex on April 19, 1993. There is no pathological evidence to suggest than any firearm death on April 19, 1993, was caused by a U.S. Government agent.
Determination of the range of fire is able to be made in 12 Davidian gunshot fatalities and, to a limited degree, in the shotgun wound death. The effects of fire and decomposition preclude determining the range of fire in 13 decedents. Range of fire determinations are made in individuals recovered from the burned structure (MC 7, 8, 20, 21, 41, 31DE, 47), burial sites (MC 76, 77, 78, 79, 80) and ravine (MC 81). Of the 20 individuals recovered from the burned structure, range of fire is able to be determined in wounds involving 6 of them (5 adults and 1 child). Each of these individuals (MC 7, 8, 20, 21, 41, 31DE) have head wounds involving very close-contact range. Ranges of fire of other gunshot wounds are not able to be determined due to the loss of tissue at the entry sites and, in some cases, the loss of interposed clothing. The absence of the aforementioned markers used to determine the range of fire in those cases where alterations of the body (i.e., decomposition, fire, loss of interposed clothing) may have obscured or erased them does not mean the wounds are distant range wounds. The adult with the shotgun wound (MC 47) sustained the injury at a muzzle-target distance before the pellets extensively spread (certainly from a shotgun discharged within the complex).
The extent of the tissue damage and the ammunition recovered from the bodies indicates wounding by low velocity ammunition with the exception of 1 person recovered from a grave (MC 77) who sustained a very close/contact range high velocity gunshot injury to the head (.223 caliber). Although one of the experts who previously reviewed some of the deaths opined that the .223 injury was received from a substantial distance or through an intermediate target because the bullet did not perforate the head as, according to this expert, a high velocity bullet would, the deposition of grossly apparent gunpowder in the depths of the wound conclusively indicates that the gunshot was received at very close/contact range.
I did not see any wounds that suggested to me the use of a sniper rifle (.50 caliber or .308 caliber).
Branch Davidian decedents with wounds consistent with being self-inflicted were found in the burned structure (MC 7, 8, 43, 20, 21, 41) and graves (MC 77, 80). Some areas of the burned structure contained remains of more than one person having wounds consistent with being self-inflicted. However, even though these wounds could have been self-inflicted, the possibility that they were inflicted by another person cannot be excluded. Determining whether a gunshot wound is self-inflicted or not involves assessing the range of fire, accessability of the entry site and physical/mental capability of the person. Any wound that is consistent with being self-inflicted could also have been inflicted by another person. Self-inflicted wounds are usually in relatively predictable sites but are not exclusive or restricted to these sites. A large number of the gunshot wounds of the head found in the remains involved entry sites typical of self-infliction (forehead, temple, oral cavity). The range of fire of some of these wounds was able to be determined and found to be very close-contact. All the contact gunshot wounds of the head found in adult Branch Davidian decedents recovered from the burned structure involved entry sites typical of being self-inflicted. However, when interpreting these “typical” injuries it must be remembered that they were not sustained in a “typical” event; instead, they have been sustained in an “atypical” situation by individuals who are not “typical” members of the general population.
Overall, the pattern of the gunshots involving the head supports self-destruction either by overt suicide, consensual execution (suicide by proxy) or, less likely, forced execution by “death squad.” At least one child (MC 31DE) sustained a very close-contact gunshot wound. The wounds sustained by 5 adults (MC 45, 22, 36, 39, 66) and 6 children (MC 35, 31A, 31DE, 53, 56, 67-7/67-8) recovered from the burned structure do not appear to be self-inflicted. Not enough information is available to assess whether the wounds of 3 other Branch Davidian decedents (MC 34, 44, 47) were likely self-inflicted. Two bodies recovered from the concrete tornado shelter grave site have gunshot wounds involving the head which may have been selfinflicted.
The entry site involving the .223 injury (MC 77) is accessible to self-infliction using this type of weapon but is not a typical entry site of a self-inflicted rifle injury and is more likely a wound inflicted by someone else. The other body (MC 80) has an intraoral gunshot entry site which, although it is a very typical entry site for a self-inflicted injury, it is not necessarily selfinflicted and can be inflicted by someone else. In this case (MC 80), surviving Branch Davidians Kathryn Schroeder and David Thibodeau indicate Mr. Jones may have been killed by another Branch Davidian. The wounds of the other individuals recovered from the graves and from the ravine are not consistent with being self-inflicted. Some of the distant entry wounds found in the Branch Davidian decedents buried in graves or found in the ravine were caused by government agents during shooting incidents on February 28, 1993. One Branch Davidian decedent (MC 79) sustained gunshot wounds of the torso and arm apparently from government agents’ fire and was subsequently executed by a fellow Branch Davidian who administered two lethal close-contact wounds to the head/neck area. One Branch Davidian (MC 8) apparently received a non-lethal gunshot during the firefight associated with the initial confrontation at the complex and subsequently received a lethal gunshot to the head on the day of the fire. Another Branch Davidian (MC 51) who died of undetermined cause on the day of the fire had received a gunshot wound of the hand on February 28, 1993.
The characteristics of the wounds also allow some assessment of the accuracy of accounts offered by various individuals involved in the incident describing the course of events (see case evaluations regarding MC 76, 77, 79, 80 and 81).
